Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Starbucks coming to Brixton

oh right. I thought from your actual full post you were against mega-corps who operated anti-competitively. Seems I misread! Sorry.
Your already weak point has just collapsed in a sorry heap.

Or are you suggesting that I should go ahead and lose my job to sock it to Microsoft or whatever?

:confused:
 
Because they have a track record of forcing out competing coffee stores leaving people with no other option but to go to Starbucks..

That website you offered as proof, had about three anecdotal stories, and in at least one of them, the proprietor said he wasn't making as much money, but was still in business.

I'm not convinced that the appearance of starbucks means the end of all nearby coffee places. It's not the case here, and as I understand it, independent coffee places continue to exist in UK.
 
Will you go into it because it's convenient?
In case you didn't know, Brixton is one of the biggest transport exchange hubs in London, with thousands of people coming in/off the tube and catching connecting buses.

I don't live next to the tube, I don't commute onwards from Brixton and there's nicer coffee shoos much closer to me.
 
That website you offered as proof, had about three anecdotal stories, and in at least one of them, the proprietor said he wasn't making as much money, but was still in business.

I'm not convinced that the appearance of starbucks means the end of all nearby coffee places. It's not the case here, and as I understand it, independent coffee places continue to exist in UK.
It's well documented, whether you choose to believe it or not.

I suggest you start with Klein, N. (2001). No Logo New York: Flamingo, if you're genuinely interested in learning more.

Some of the methods Starbucks have used to expand and maintain their dominant market position, including buying out competitors' leases, intentionally operating at a loss, and clustering several locations in a small geographical area (i.e., saturating the market), have been labeled anti-competitive by critics.

For example, Starbucks fueled its initial expansion into the UK market with a buyout of Seattle Coffee Company, but then used its capital and influence to obtain prime locations, some of which operated at a financial loss. Critics claimed this was an unfair attempt to drive out small, independent competitors, who could not afford to pay inflated prices for premium real estate
 
Your already weak point has just collapsed in a sorry heap.

Or are you suggesting that I should go ahead and lose my job to sock it to Microsoft or whatever?

:confused:

Nah, just acknowledging the hypocrisy of condemning starbucks as corporate anti-competitive sons of bitches while typing on a dell keyboard and posting via Microsoft windows would do
 
Nah, just acknowledging the hypocrisy of condemning starbucks as corporate anti-competitive sons of bitches while typing on a dell keyboard and posting via Microsoft windows would do
Are you drunk?

Oh, and I've got a lovely Logitech keyboard, thanks. It's great.
 
It's well documented, whether you choose to believe it or not.

I suggest you start with Klein, N. (2001). No Logo New York: Flamingo, if you're genuinely interested in learning more.

Perhaps your independents should get together and take a junket over here, so that our independents can instruct them in how to continue to thrive with a starbucks in the neighborhood. Because many of them have continued to do so for many years.

My favourite italian coffee place has a starbucks right across the street.

http://www.cafecalabria.com/

http://www.yelp.ca/biz/starbucks-coffee-company-vancouver-78

Check out the addresses.
 
Perhaps your independents should get together and take a junket over here, so that our independents can instruct them in how to continue to thrive with a starbucks in the neighborhood. Because many of them have continued to do so for many years.

My favourite italian coffee place has a starbucks right across the street.

http://www.cafecalabria.com/

http://www.yelp.ca/biz/starbucks-coffee-company-vancouver-78

Check out the addresses.
This is pointless. Are you saying that Starbucks have never employed anti-competitive practices?
 
It's well documented, whether you choose to believe it or not.

I suggest you start with Klein, N. (2001). No Logo New York: Flamingo, if you're genuinely interested in learning more.

Naomi klein? Words fail me here. Surely she was discredited even amongst the most foolish years ago? How much did ms Klein make from royalties on that title?
 
This is pointless. Are you saying that Starbucks have never employed anti-competitive practices?

No. I'm saying that well regarded independents serving a good product can continue to thrive whether or not a starbucks comes into the neighborhood.


Seattle's Best Coffee was another chain, not a small independent business, btw. It continues to do business here, in any event.
 
Naomi klein? Words fail me here. Surely she was discredited even amongst the most foolish years ago? How much did ms Klein make from royalties on that title?
I'm not interested in what's subsequently happened to Klein, but I don't recall Starbucks taking her to court for what she documented about their practices in her book, and that's all I'm interested in here.

If you have any evidence that her information about Starbuck's practices was incorrect, feel free to post it here.

So what have you got? Anything other than ad hominems?
 
And what about the evidence of shops being forced out of business? Why are you ignoring that?

I'm not ignoring it. Has the introduction of a Starbucks ever caused a similar business to fail? It would be surprising if it hadn't. Business and businesses are competitive, and businesses fail all the time.

But the fact remains that well run businesses serving a good product that have built up a loyal clientele, will often survive many situations that might cause setbacks or failure - including the introduction of a starbucks.

This is what you're ignoring, and the desire to set aside or ignore evidence that independent businesses can survive the introduction of a starbucks, is what leads me to say that there is an element of hysteria to the opposition. People there should take heart in hearing that good coffee shops have survived in the face of a new starbucks.

There is another possibility: namely, that the local coffee businesses aren't really up to scratch, either in terms of product or service or whatever, and that an efficient new operation in the neighborhood will put them out of business.

Loyalty's a good thing. I tend to be loyal to businesses that deliver the goods. I think most people are like that. If your local coffee shop isn't delivering the goods, it had better make plans to shape up really soon.
 
The people in Federation Coffee seem pretty sanguine about the imminent arrival of Starbucks. They know their customers won't desert them.
 
The cold dead hand of JC2 strikes yet again.

You know, you might even be right, so this is the last I'll say on this thread:

There are people here who wouldn't accept it if I said that the sun was shining, on a sunny day. That's fine: I'm speaking more to the more reasonable people of good sense.

My message has been that the advent of a Starbucks in the neighborhood, needn't sound the death knell for the good local independent. I have firsthand evidence of that from the city I live in, which also has Starbucks locations by the hundreds, including franchise operations. The good local coffee places have not only survived, they have thrived and even multiplied, themselves.

This should be good news for Brixton residents, as there's no reason for your experience to be any different than ours, assuming that the local independents were good operations in the first place.

It may be that you are against Starbucks because it's a high profile American Company, or because you think it is the left hand of the Devil or something. If so, then there's not much to discuss. To the rest of you, take note: the end is not near. :D
 
The people in Federation Coffee seem pretty sanguine about the imminent arrival of Starbucks. They know their customers won't desert them.
That's not surprising seeing as it's a fair distance away and has its own clientèle, but I'm not so sure cafes like San Marino will be so laid back
 
with Starbucks' vast billions, they've just bagged themselves the #1 prime slot right next to the tube station.

Even with the most 'intelligence' in the world, busy people will generally pick the closest coffee shop to where they're going.

In case you didn't know, Brixton is one of the biggest transport exchange hubs in London, with thousands of people coming in/off the tube and catching connecting buses. .

I think the new SB will tap into the commuters using transport exchange hub in a way that other local coffee shops do not. Commuters want to get home. They don't tend to head off the beaten track to get a coffee. There's not alot catering for them in the direct walk between BR, the tube and bus stops south of the railway bridge. I imagine that there is quite a lot of commuter demand that is not being met and that SB will pick this up with minimum detriment to other shops.

I also imagine that if Brixton residents heading to the tube in the morning are in the habit of buying coffee from a local store they will continue to do so. Unless they think SB has a better product or perhaps a shorter queue. In which case that is fair competition. I am fairly sure that SB will be more expensive than most local offerings so I doubt it will be a choice made on price.
 
I think the new SB will tap into the commuters using transport exchange hub in a way that other local coffee shops do not.
I would have thought that San Marino was hoping for a bit of that action, no? If only they could have afforded the rent...
 
And what about the evidence of shops being forced out of business? Why are you ignoring that?

I'm interested to hear how a franchise operation accomplishes this. I've always been of the view that SB is quite expensive for what it is. My understanding is that most anti competitive practices involved pushing prices down so far that your smaller competitor doesn't have the economies of scale and has to fold.

They are also closing 100's of stores in the states so I dont think its such a cut and dried deal.
 
I would have thought that San Marino was hoping for a bit of that action, no? If only they could have afforded the rent...

Hmm, actually I think San Marino's have always been reasonably relaxed about the action they get (I used to live next door to them & spoke with them about it on occasions).
A sort of north/south divide caused by the railway bridge & location of the tube means that SM have always relied on passing trade from tube & bus goers coming from the North side of Brix, they never really got those coming from south Brix - this is backed up by many people I know who lived south Brix, some for many years, not even knowing SM existed.
I spoke to him last week, & he's quite happy about the rise in passing trade at the weekends & evenings now that they are open until 8 in the much more prominent shop. He also has a big customer base of Brixton based workers who use it every day.
Also a regular double shot latte in SM is still only £1.80 - I don't know what SB charges but I bet it's double that & still tastes like shit.
 
Hmm, actually I think San Marino's have always been reasonably relaxed about the action they get (I used to live next door to them & spoke with them about it on occasions).
I'm also thinking of folks who arrive early before Academy gigs which San Marino were perfectly poised to serve. There's not much at all along the strip between the tube and the Academy and having a Starbucks right next to the station may cut off a fair bit of their potential custom (assuming that both shops stay open past 6pm, of course).
 
I'm interested to hear how a franchise operation accomplishes this. I've always been of the view that SB is quite expensive for what it is. My understanding is that most anti competitive practices involved pushing prices down so far that your smaller competitor doesn't have the economies of scale and has to fold.

They are also closing 100's of stores in the states so I dont think its such a cut and dried deal.

Starbucks latest annual statement suggests that they intend to cut down on franchises and increase company owned stores for this latest expansion.
The thinning out is a direct result of crowding out local shops... saturate the market until per-store growth begins to reverse then thin back out again.
 
I would have thought that San Marino was hoping for a bit of that action, no? If only they could have afforded the rent...

I just popped in to see them in their new place - which is great!

Had a chat and they were not worried at all about SB. Actually laughed. They said their coffee is better and cheaper and they are confident that they have a regular loyal customer base. They also do proper good priced food rather than snacks.

I don't imagine they would have preferred the other location. They certainly would not have all the outdoor seating or massive street frontage. I don't know how much they are paying, or how much the tube outlet is letting for but San Marino will have made decisions to suit their business plan. Just because SB is probably paying an arm and a leg for the site (and helping subsidise the tube by doing so) doesn't mean that all the other 'poor old' traders wanted it. I think you are worrying unnecessarily on their behalf.

If Pizza Hut returned to the high street, would it cannibalise Franco Manca's customer base? Not a chance.
 
If Pizza Hut returned to the high street, would it cannibalise Franco Manca's customer base? Not a chance.

I think you're overestimating how discerning most people are when it comes to coffee. Starbucks sells because most people either don't know good coffee from bad or just don't care.
 
I think you're overestimating how discerning most people are when it comes to coffee. Starbucks sells because most people either don't know good coffee from bad or just don't care.

Yeah, but these are Brixtonites who are in many ways like Hampstead-ites when it comes to a lot of consumer issues - I reckon there's enough coffee drinkers in Brixton to suport a Bucks and San Marino and Federation. You'll see the white, m/c types going to SMs and Federation, and the rest of Brixton visiting the Bucks, much like the differing clientele in the restaurants.
 
Have you actually been to SM during lunch hours Kyser? It's a real old mix up of local office workers and residents, not some kind of home for white m/c types
 
I think you're overestimating how discerning most people are when it comes to coffee. Starbucks sells because most people either don't know good coffee from bad or just don't care.

On that basis - what have San Marino got to worry about? Theirs is considerably cheaper.

As for convenience, as I previously posted I imagine that there is quite a lot of commuter demand that is not being met by the position of existing outlets and that SB will pick this up with minimum detriment to other shops.
 
Have you actually been to SM during lunch hours Kyser? It's a real old mix up of local office workers and residents, not some kind of home for white m/c types

It never looks particularly "white m/c" at the weekend either tbf.
 
Back
Top Bottom